what about s+m vs s+m? [Archive]

PDA

View Full Version : what about s+m vs s+m?

METAL4LIFE_928

03-06-2006, 12:30 AM

what about s and m vs s and merc since its called double agent?

METAL4LIFE_928

03-06-2006, 12:30 AM

what about s and m vs s and merc since its called double agent?

FIN-Ravager

03-06-2006, 02:25 AM

And I thought SvS was the worst idea ever.

Brownsnakeeyes

03-06-2006, 02:49 AM

Well since nobody here has played SvS yet what are you basing your opinion on? Who knows SvS could end up being better then SvM.

Eclyps3

03-06-2006, 03:25 AM

salvationx

03-06-2006, 04:13 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Brownsnakeeyes:
Well since nobody here has played SvS yet what are you basing your opinion on? Who knows SvS could end up being better then SvM. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
hmm,,i personally think S vs S mode is 4
some nOObs/kids who don't wanna be merc...but i also don't comprehend y people being antipathy about S vs S ( totally because i'm also a kind of kid http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif)....

goodkebab_00

03-06-2006, 05:17 AM

people dont really have anything against SvsS, it is the fear that SvsM is going to get ditched which has people upset so they complain about having to play a game that is different from what they enjoy so much.

Even press releases have stated that they wanted to make a noob friendly game, which threatens the high learning curve and complexity that makes SvsM so rewarding.

goodkebab_00

03-06-2006, 05:21 AM

what makes the idea presented in this thread disfunctional is that it has nothing to do with the game mechanics that make this game unique. ie: merc cannot do coop moves or acrobatic maneuvers which will prevent any team style tactics.

CovertKi11

03-06-2006, 04:26 PM

Lol, sorry buddy, Ston3 beat you to this.

EDIT- Don't take my word for it, see for yourself.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3651075192...161055553#8161055553 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3651075192/m/8161055553/r/8161055553#8161055553)

drunkrepublican

03-06-2006, 04:29 PM

Sorry, but Spies VS Mercs should stay Spies vs Mercs

pdogsniper

03-06-2006, 05:00 PM

And just for the record- S+M (S&M)is different (a lot) than SvM. Just to clear that up.

Malleus.

03-06-2006, 05:07 PM

I have a super idea for "easy to pick up", mainstreamed, simple, competitive multiplayer:

<drum roll>

Merc vs Merc!!
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

FN57

03-06-2006, 05:48 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Malleus.:
I have a super idea for "easy to pick up", mainstreamed, simple, competitive multiplayer:

<drum roll>

Merc vs Merc!!
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

At first when Pandora tomorrow came out, I thought it would be a dent thing to do to get the mercenaries ready for online play since it might take moregetting used to the merc abilities then the spy abilities...but then after i played SvM in PT...MvM would probably be the worst idea...but I'd rather play that then SvS...

They just need to stick with SvM and thats it.

cellfan88

03-06-2006, 05:49 PM

Lol... that's probably the idea that they'll end up using next.
They'll be like, we have SvS, so why don't we make MvM!!!!1!!1111!

ElBozo

03-06-2006, 10:07 PM

chaos_theory16

03-06-2006, 10:22 PM

Well, at least Ubi can give us poor fella's without high speed internet a maximum or four players System Link. 2 people per Xbox and T.V. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I was sad when I found out SC:CT only had a maximum of two players... One per T.V. and Xbox.

Cheeserdude

03-09-2006, 06:16 PM

vega13

03-09-2006, 10:34 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by METAL4LIFE_928:
what about s and m vs s and merc since its called double agent? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you talking about two seperate teams each containing a spy and a merc on the same team, pitted against each other? Besides the spy vs. spy part (I just don't see how it will work), I think it sounds interesting. Don't know how it would work. Be a fun little added feature, but definitely not a replacement.

shadow_ninja961

03-10-2006, 09:51 AM

Hold it a minute,i got a question,or two.

For those who are complaining that S vs M won't be on their system,but instead will have S vs S, well, can't you still play S vs M on chaos theory?

everyone seems to be acting like they won't be able to play S vs M if it isn't in Double Agent.

I'm just wondering why complain if you will still be able to play it on CT.?

I remember when PT came out with S vs M and i was thinking,"now why didn't they make it Spy vs Spy instead?". because splinter cell was all about stealth,and why would anyone want to be a merc? they are the opposite of stealth.

I think S vs S will be fun and more challenging against another stealthy opponent.

I prefer the 1st Splinter Cell in the series,and i go back and play it all the time.
Since PT and CT offered a different play experiance than the first,i go back and play the one i like the most.If you like S vs M then play it on the games that offer it and learn to deal with it.

as to this thread,i don't think Spies and mercs vs Spies and mercs is a good idea but that doesn't mean UBI won't.

braiog

03-10-2006, 11:59 AM

Of course we can still play SvM on CT. Services won't be shut down for that as soon as DA comes out.

But have you played SvM on CT? Do you know how many bugs and glitches there are in that:? Do you think Ubi's gonna patch it any time soon? Ubi's support for games is legendary; in a bad way. There just isn't any.

We'd rather Ubi's new MP feature a fixed and revised version of SvM, but with what we've seen so far, they've taken SvM in a very odd direction (let alone who knows what platforms it will be out for). Even when SvM came out on the day CT was released, it was using an ancient game engine.

Same deal here happened with Mechwarrior (my all time favorite series) The publisher kept using low-ball no-name developers who kept using the same engine over a period of 3 full games and 2 add-on packs. After milking the community who was playing on a 4+ year old engine, they called it quits and shut down production of the Mechwarrior series.

A joke. A prime example of how pitiful a bad publisher/developer can treat the community. It's the same thing here. We're pretty much sure Ubi hasn't heard a word of what we want. We're sure there will be many new bugs. But we're also sure that we're tired of playing SvM in such an ancient engine.

There's no reason SvM couldn't look gorgeous; it's only 2v2. Well, it SHOULD ONLY BE 2v2.

shadow_ninja961

03-10-2006, 02:15 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by braiog:
Of course we can still play SvM on CT. Services won't be shut down for that as soon as DA comes out.

But have you played SvM on CT? Do you know how many bugs and glitches there are in that:? Do you think Ubi's gonna patch it any time soon? Ubi's support for games is legendary; in a bad way. There just isn't any.

We'd rather Ubi's new MP feature a fixed and revised version of SvM, but with what we've seen so far, they've taken SvM in a very odd direction (let alone who knows what platforms it will be out for). Even when SvM came out on the day CT was released, it was using an ancient game engine.

Same deal here happened with Mechwarrior (my all time favorite series) The publisher kept using low-ball no-name developers who kept using the same engine over a period of 3 full games and 2 add-on packs. After milking the community who was playing on a 4+ year old engine, they called it quits and shut down production of the Mechwarrior series.

A joke. A prime example of how pitiful a bad publisher/developer can treat the community. It's the same thing here. We're pretty much sure Ubi hasn't heard a word of what we want. We're sure there will be many new bugs. But we're also sure that we're tired of playing SvM in such an ancient engine.

There's no reason SvM couldn't look gorgeous; it's only 2v2. Well, it SHOULD ONLY BE 2v2. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

well, i definately see your point.
no,i don't play S vs M so i wasn't aware of the problems but i thought those kind of bugs could be fixed via downloads,either for Xbox live or P.C.

So then you'd rather UBI not even put out a S vs M unless it was bug free and with an updated engine?

I myself like the engine the original splinter cell was made on.the camera in CT was messed up.
I would have been perfectly satisfied if UBI had continued the series by just making new levels for the original game.

Think of Splinter Cell like a chocolate chip cookie.I love chocolate chip cookies.I loved them as a child,a teenager and now as an adult.
I don't want new ingredients added,or sprinkles or icing or nuts or M&M's.i just like plain old chocolate chip cookies.but with splinter cell,they keep adding other ingredients so that it is no longer the chocolate chip cookie we came to love at the beginning.now they've put in so many other things that it no longer resembles what it started as.

my only point is that everything doesn't need to be "New and Improved". there are things we love just the way they are. the kola cell and vselka additions to Splinter Cell complimented it well.I really looked forward to more of the same from UBI but instead i've been constantly disapointed.now it looks as though double agent will be like an entirely new game and as different from the original as an oatmeal cookie is different from a chocolate chip cookie.

there are many analogies a person could draw upon to get the same point across. i used chocolate chip because of all the cookies in the world,my favorite is chocolate chip.and i've never felt that it should be changed in any way.

some of you are disapointed because you may lose S vs M,but at least you've gotten what you wanted in the last two games. it looks like i may never get what i want out of splinter cell again,and that would be for UBI to go back and give me what i came to love in the first place.

change is NOT always a good thing.

Eclyps3

03-10-2006, 03:30 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by shadow_ninja961:
well, i definately see your point.
no,i don't play S vs M so i wasn't aware of the problems but i thought those kind of bugs could be fixed via downloads,either for Xbox live or P.C.

So then you'd rather UBI not even put out a S vs M unless it was bug free and with an updated engine? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, Braiog's point was that Ubi doesn't really care to patch SC all that much.
PT's Versus got a few pathes that took care of a couple of Extremely abusable bugs and inbalances. However there were like 100 things left to fix. Instead of patching them, they fixed some of them for CT's Versus. That's why people call CT's Versus a patch for PT.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">some of you are disapointed because you may lose S vs M,but at least you've gotten what you wanted in the last two games. it looks like i may never get what i want out of splinter cell again,and that would be for UBI to go back and give me what i came to love in the first place. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know what you mean. If PT and (especially)CT managed to keep the original's amosphere and feel I'd love them for their Single Player, too. Alas, it's no longer the cookie I liked.

SplintacellDA

03-10-2006, 03:54 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by METAL4LIFE_928:
what about s and m vs s and merc since its called double agent? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
are you kidding me? The object of the multiplayer game is for the mercs to stop the spys from acheving the objectives so they can get payed big money. If it was S&M vs. S&M there would be no point of a battle it would be them fighting for nothing. Most of all if you were merc how would you tell your aly spy from enemi spy? Paint them green? There couldnt be objectives and Merc Vrs a merc is just wrong. If i wanted fragging and guns blarrin at people ill play halo! So what youve just sugested is just mentally insane and unstable